Assessing the Supervisor-Subordinate Relationship Involving Part-Time Employees

Abstract

Many college students have part-time jobs for a variety of reasons, including finances, skill enhancement, networking, personal satisfaction, and confidence. Part-time employees often differ from full-time employees on their organizational knowledge, involvement, and satisfaction. This study explored communication between college student part-time employees and their supervisors through the use of leader-member exchange theory. According to this theory, there are many personal and professional benefits for employees when they have quality relationships with their supervisors. Participants included 210 undergraduate students from a large mid-Atlantic university. College student part-time employees’ leader-member exchange was significantly and positively related to their organizational assimilation, organizational identification, work motivation, and career relevancy.

Keywords

leader-member exchange theory part-time employees organizational identification organizational assimilation job motivation

Part-time employees constitute a substantial and steadily growing portion of the U.S. labor market. Part-time work has doubled in the United States over the past 5 years, with part-time employment accounting for 8.9 million jobs (Marsteller, 2011). Moreover, college students compose a major segment of the part-time workforce, with more than 45% of traditional-aged undergraduate students attending school full-time while working part-time jobs (Perna, 2010). An additional 23% of full-time students work more than 35 hours in a workweek (King, 2006). It is evident that college students are balancing their college careers with the added responsibility of working part-time jobs. Although the number of employees working part-time jobs has continued to increase over the previous few years, scant academic attention has focused on the communication experiences of part-time employees (Ballard & Gossett, 2008). Furthermore, fewer studies have examined college students and how they interact with their supervisors in their part-time jobs. Feldman (1990) noted that research is needed about part-time employees because they have become necessary for survival for many industries in the global marketplace and such employment offers work opportunities for young workers (< 24 years). With college students occupying a large portion of part-time employment in today’s economy, they offer an excellent sample for learning more about communication in part-time jobs.

A major component of communication in the organization involves the relationship between supervisors and subordinates (Jablin, 1979, 1987, 2001). This relationship is vital for the exchange of needed information about the organization, instructions about work roles, and feedback about job performance (Jablin, 2001). Overall, the supervisor-subordinate relationship is a key component of helping employees effectively assimilate and feel identified with their organizations (Sluss, Ployhart, Cobb, & Ashforth, 2012). However, these conclusions deal with full-time employees rather than part-time employees, leaving a major proportion of the workforce unaccounted for in understanding supervisor-subordinate relationships and organizational assimilation. More attention should be devoted to exploring the role of supervisors in helping part-time employees integrate into the organization. Foote (2004) argued that part-time employees are often at a disadvantage when learning the ropes of an organization because they receive less attention than traditional full-time employees; thus, supervisors need to be aware of the potential that part-time employees have for contributing to the functioning of the organization. Additionally, few scholars have explored how the relationship formed between part-time employees and their supervisors may influence their motivation to work or the relevancy of their current jobs for their future career aspirations. Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory (Liden & Graen, 1980) offers a way of testing how the supervisor-subordinate relationship affects organizational outcomes (i.e., organizational assimilation and identification) and individual outcomes (i.e., job motivation and career relevance). As such, the purpose of this study was to examine, on the basis of LMX, the supervisor-subordinate relationship and its impact on organizational outcomes of assimilation and identification and on individual outcomes of job motivation and career relevance among college students working part-time jobs. Using LMX theory for this study is important for three reasons. First, it can extend prior knowledge of supervisor-subordinate relationships from the full-time context into the part-time context. Second, LMX theory offers an opportunity for researchers to better understand how the communication between part-time employees and their supervisors contributes to how part-time employees feel about the organization and their jobs. Third, exploring the communication between part-time employees and their supervisors through LMX theory can provide a basis for learning more about the integral role that supervisors have in the development of part-time employees.

Literature Review

Part-Time Employees

A part-time employee is one who works fewer than 35 hours in a typical workweek (Feldman, 1990; Kalleberg, 2000; Rotchford & Roberts, 1982). Rotchford and Roberts (1982) argued that part-time employees are “missing persons” in organizational research, as few meaningful conclusions about part-time employees have been drawn by researchers. A prominent line of research has explored attitudinal differences between part-time and full-time employees, generating inconclusive and often contradictory findings (Feldman, 1990). Eberhardt and Shani (1984) reported that part-time employees exhibited more favorable attitudes toward their jobs than full-time employees, while other researchers have discovered that full-time employees reported more positive work experiences than part-time workers (Jackofsky & Peters, 1987; Logan, O’Reilly, & Roberts, 1973; H. E. Miller & Terborg, 1979; Wakefield, Curry, Mueller, & Price, 1987; Walther, 1988). Thorsteinson (2003) provided some clarity to the debate by revealing through a meta-analysis that there are limited differences between the attitudes of part-time and full-time employees involving job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Thorsteinson added that full-time employees were more involved with their jobs than part-time employees and suggested that part-time employees might have less of a need for organizational involvement.

The impact of part-time work on students has been well chronicled by researchers. Greenberger, Steinberg, and Ruggiero (1982) found that working part-time jobs provides students with opportunities for learning, initiative and autonomy, and social interaction. Students working part-time jobs may also learn valuable lessons about taking responsibility in their organizations and influencing others (Greenberger & Steinberg, 1981). While a majority of research indicates positive developmental opportunities for students working part-time jobs, some arguments place part-time jobs among college students in a negative light. Greenberger, Steinberg, Vaux, and McAuliffe (1980) reported that working part-time jobs reduces the amount of time spent with family members and may limit the cohesiveness developed with others in the workplace. Furthermore, working more than 20 hours a week in a part-time job may have adverse impact on students’ self-reliance and self-esteem (Steinberg, Fegley, & Dornbusch, 1993), but it exerts no impact on student grade point average (Nonis & Hudson, 2006).

College students work part-time jobs for a myriad of reasons, with the primary reason being financial. As tuition continue to rise, it has become a key reason why students work (Farrell, 2005). Richardson, Evans, and Gbadamosi (2009) found that college students worked part-time jobs as a means to meet their basic living expenses, fund their social lives, and pay for their tuition. Additionally, college students may gain part-time employment in an effort to develop their skill sets and to match what they learn in their courses to their experiences as workers (Richardson et al., 2009). Curtis and Shani (2002) found that college students may also work part-time jobs to feel a sense of satisfaction and self-confidence, while Lucas and Lamont (1998) reported that college students find part-time jobs helpful for forming new connections with coworkers and developing friendships in addition to enhancing their credentials for future career aspirations.

Interacting with supervisors on the job seemingly plays a role in students’ attitudes about their work as well (Greenberger & Steinberg, 1981). Specifically, employees find their jobs more satisfying when they have the opportunity to interact on a regular basis with their supervisors (Kane, Healy, & Henson, 1992; Levanoni & Sales, 1990; Steffy & Jones, 1990; Thorsteinson, 2003). The evidence of past research suggests that part-time employees may experience improved organizational and personal outcomes when they develop satisfying relationships with their supervisors. Graen and Uhl-Bien (1991) argued that supervisors have the opportunity to transcend their formal positions as managers in the organization and serve as leaders who earn respect from their employees beyond the positional power they have and who inspire their employees toward achieving individual and organizational outcomes. They can also encourage employees to take initiative and transform the organization. In this sense, leaders develop mature “leadership” relationships with their employees through incremental influence, mutual trust, sharing of common goals, and support (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1991, 1995). LMX provides a useful theory for understanding the relational component of the supervisor-subordinate dyad and its outcomes.

Leader-Member Exchange

Supervisors can develop qualitatively different relationships with their employees (Dansereau, Cashman, & Graen, 1973; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). Due to the various time and resource constraints placed on them in organizations, supervisors share their positional or personal resources with employees whom they perceive to best handle such responsibilities and latitude (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). Based on the communicative exchanges and performance of employees, the quality of relationships can be conceptualized as in-groups and out-groups (Dansereau, Graen, & Haga, 1975). Employees who are seen as trustworthy and skillful in performing their duties within the organization are those likely to be perceived as in-group members. Conversely, employees who are seen as lacking the trust of management and exhibiting less job competency tend to compose the out-group (Bauer & Green, 1996; Krone, Kramer, & Sias, 2010).

Employees with high-quality LMXs enjoy a host of benefits, such as greater trust (Bauer & Green, 1996); enhanced negotiation latitude, which refers to the ability of employees to discuss job-related matters with their supervisors (Dansereau et al., 1975); greater job satisfaction (Graen, Novak, & Sommerkamp, 1982); greater role clarity and job competency (Gerstner & Day, 1997); improved information quality (Sias, 2005); less formality in communication (Krone et al., 2010); more breadth and depth of communication (Fairhurst & Chandler, 1989); greater use of relational maintenance behaviors (Waldron, 1991); more frequent engagement in organizational citizenship behaviors (Deluga, 1994); and more comfort articulating dissent (Kassing, 2000b). In-group members also find upward influence situations less threatening (Waldron & Sanderson, 2011); are more committed to workgroups (Bakar, Dilbeck, & McCroskey, 2010); and are more satisfied with interpersonal, group, and organizational contexts (Mueller & Lee, 2002) and supervision (Gerstner & Day, 1997). High-quality relationships between supervisors and subordinates may also be thought of as mentoring relationships (Scandura & Schriesheim, 1994) or as partnerships (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1991). Yet, employees reporting lower-quality LMX relationships tend to experience fewer organizational perks and outcomes and are more likely to leave the organization (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995).

Graen and Scandura (1987) theorized that the supervisor-subordinate relationship may develop from a more formal to a less formal relationship through the role development process, consisting of three stages. In the role-taking stage, employees and supervisors assess each other’s skills, abilities, and competencies. The role-making stage involves supervisors and subordinates openly negotiating roles. Role routinization involves the supervisor and subordinate agreeing to the levels of autonomy afforded to each other becoming an accepted and regular component of the supervisor-subordinate relationship. The supervisor-subordinate relationship becomes more similar to a partnership during role routinization. Jablin (2001) concluded that the quality of exchanges between supervisors and subordinates is a likely determinant of successful organizational assimilation for newcomers. Exploring exchanges between supervisors and subordinates in part-time jobs and the ability for supervisors to influence subordinate growth holds key potential to help part-time employees assimilate into the culture of the organization and learn about the various roles and tasks to be performed in their job experiences.

Organizational Assimilation

Organizational assimilation is a process that transpires wherein organizational newcomers gradually learn their roles, tasks, and the culture of the organization. Jablin and Krone (1987) defined organizational assimilation as process where individuals enter the organization, become integrated, and eventually leave the organization. Similarly, Gailliard, Myers, and Seibold (2010) stated that organizational assimilation was a “simultaneous, reciprocal, and ongoing process related to multiple dimensions in organizational life” (p. 554). Drawing from the work of K. K. Myers and Oetzel’s (2003) attempt to better understand organizational assimilation as a dynamic and ongoing process, Gailliard and colleagues found that organizational assimilation consisted of seven dimensions regarding how newcomers are integrated into their organizations: familiarity with coworkers, familiarity with supervisors, acculturation, recognition, involvement, job competency, and role negotiation.

Familiarity with coworkers involves the opportunity to integrate and form relationships with peers in the organization. Familiarity with supervisors includes interacting and forming relationships with authority figures. Acculturation involves familiarizing oneself with the culture and norms of the organization. Recognition involves being identified as a valuable and important contributor to organizational processes. Involvement is characterized by finding ways to participate and contribute to the organization. Job competency includes an understanding of organizational tasks and the skills necessary to perform well in the organization. Role negotiation is latitude provided to employees in their ability to alter the nature of their role in the organization, congruent with their perceptions and abilities (Gailliard et al., 2010; K. K. Myers & Oetzel, 2003). During organizational assimilation, the relationship with supervisors is one of the most important sources for helping organizational members integrate and feel like contributing members in their organizations (Jablin, 1984). Foote (2004) argued that many organizations fail in properly socializing their part-time employees. The author suggested that organizations must make better efforts in helping their temporary employees integrate, become contributing members, and remain in the organization. The quality of relationships that part-time employees form with their supervisors should play a key role in helping them effectively assimilate into the organization; thus, the following prediction was formulated:

Hypothesis 1: LMX will be significantly and positively related to organizational assimilation.

Organizational Identification

Organizational identification involves organizational members associating with and acting in their organization’s best interest (Cheney, 1983a; Cheney & Tompkins, 1987). Identification is an important component of organizational experiences “because it is the process by which people come to define themselves, communicate that definition to others, and use that definition to navigate their lives” (Ashforth, Harrison, & Corely, 2008, p. 334). Additionally, organizational identification can vary across time and space (Scott, Corman, & Cheney, 1998; Scott & Stephens, 2009), and it occurs when employees begin to consider their needs in conjunction with the needs of the organization (Cheney, 1983a). Organizations may actively encourage identification and socialization with the use of persuasive techniques (Cheney, 1983b; Scott et al., 1999). Organizational identification is greater for employees who feel more socialized into their organization (Bullis & Bach, 1989), perceive their supervisors as competent communicators (S. A. Myers & Kassing, 1998), who are able to more freely express themselves (Kassing, 2000a), and have had prior exposure to the organization before entering (Stephens & Dailey, 2012).

Scott and colleagues (1999) suggested that the relationships that develop between supervisors and subordinates play a crucial role in the identification that one feels in the organization. The more familiar employees are with their supervisors, the greater identification they feel with their organizations (Gailliard et al., 2010; K. K. Myers & Oetzel, 2003; Sluss & Ashforth, 2008). When newcomers to an organization view their supervisors more favorably, they report having greater identification with their organizations (Sluss et al., 2012). Based on these conclusions, it would be reasonable to expect that part-time employees who develop satisfying relationships with their supervisors would be more likely to identify with their organization.

Hypothesis 2: LMX will be significantly and positively related to the organizational identification of part-time employees.

Career Relevance

Career relevance implies that students working part-time jobs find value in them and believe that the skills learned in performing those jobs are transferrable to future careers. Tilly (1992) reasoned that part-time jobs that offer employees opportunity to develop their skills for future careers could be called retention jobs. Part-time employees are more satisfied when their part-time jobs are congruent with their intended career paths (Feldman & Doerpinghaus, 1992; Kane et al., 1992). Lucas and Lamont (1998) concluded that students find more value in their jobs when they can apply experiences from their part-time jobs to their future careers. Similarly, McKechnie and colleagues (2010) reported that students working part-time jobs learn valuable lessons in communicating with their customers and with one another, thus generating a set of competent communication skills valuable for future careers. It is possible that supervisors may play a role in helping their part-time employees see benefits of their work beyond their current employment. To account for that prediction, the following hypothesis was formulated:

Hypothesis 3: LMX will be significantly and positively related to the career relevance of part-time employees.

Job Motivation

Job motivation refers to how inspired part-time employees are to perform their work. Supervisory communication exerts an impact on employee motivation (Porter, Wrench, & Hoskinson, 2007) and efficacy for performing work (Mayfield & Mayfield, 2012). When students working part-time jobs believe that they are able to apply what they have learned in their college courses to their occupations, they tend to be more motivated to perform their best work (Stern, Stone, Hopkins, & McMillion, 1990). Martin and Hafer (1995) found that part-time employees who felt more involved with their jobs demonstrated more organizational commitment, and Feldman and Doerpinghaus (1992) stated that part-time employees who liked their jobs were more motivated. One could reasonably expect that as part-time employees develop relationships with their supervisors, they would be more motivated to perform their jobs. The following hypothesis was formulated to account for the expectation that the quality of the supervisor-subordinate relationship could enhance work motivation. Furthermore, to understand what variables in this study contribute to the supervisor-subordinate relationship of part-time employees, a research question was posed:

Hypothesis 4: LMX will be significantly and positively related to the job motivation of part-time employees.

Research Question 1: To what extent do part-time employees’ organizational assimilation, organizational identification, career relevance, and job motivation account for their LMX?

Method

Participants

Participants in the research study included 210 undergraduate students enrolled in a variety of introductory-level communication courses at a large mid-Atlantic university. Participants had to currently hold a part-time job and work fewer than 35 hours in typical workweek (Rotchford & Roberts, 1982). The sample was composed of 133 men and 76 women (1 unidentified). Ages of participants ranged from 18 to 51 (M = 21.20, SD = 3.03). Job industries represented in the sample included retail (n = 43), manufacturing (n = 4), government (n = 2), service (n = 75), medical (n = 11), financial (n = 2), education (n = 15), and other (n = 54). Length of employment ranged from 1 to 84 months (M = 14.6, SD = 15.44), and average amount of hours worked by participants in the sample was nearly 20 (M = 19.87, SD = 7.79).

Procedures and Instruments

Data were collected at the beginning of several class sessions, where participants were provided course credit for responding to a variety of self-report measures designed to assess communication in their part-time jobs. Participants were provided a cover letter informing them that by completing the questionnaire and returning it to the research team, they agreed to participate in the study. The instruments completed by the participants included the LMX-7, Organizational Assimilation Index, Organizational Identification Questionnaire, the Motivation Scale, and a scale developed specifically for use in the study to measure career relevancy.

LMX was measured with the LMX-7 (Graen et al., 1982), a 7-item measure that asks participants to rate their interactions with supervisors. Responses are solicited with a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients have been strong, with scores ranging from .80 to .92 (Bezuijen, van Dam, van den Berg, & Thierry, 2010; Harris & Kacmar, 2006; Mueller & Lee, 2002). The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient for the present study was .83 (M = 3.79, SD = 0.66).

Organizational assimilation was measured with the Organizational Assimilation Index (Gailliard et al., 2010), a 24-item measure used to assess employees’ integration into the culture of the organization across seven dimensions: familiarity with coworkers, familiarity with supervisors, acculturation, recognition, involvement, job competency, and role negotiation. Responses are solicited with a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Previous Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients for each subscale have ranged from .63 to .95 (Gailliard et al., 2010; Sollitto, Johnson, & Myers, 2013). The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients for the present study were as follows: .77 for coworker familiarity (M = 4.04, SD = 0.65), .80 for supervisor familiarity (M = 3.59, SD = 0.85), .77 for acculturation (M = 4.29, SD = 0.56), .89 for recognition (M = 3.78, SD = 0.88), .76 for involvement (M = 3.20, SD = 0.93), .68 for job competency (M = 3.99, SD = 0.60), and .76 for role negotiation (M = 3.32, SD = 0.83).

Organizational identification was measured with 5 items from the Organizational Identification Questionnaire (Cheney, 1983a), a measure that assesses how identified employees are with their organizations. The 5 items were as follows: “In general, I view my organization’s problems as my own,” “I become irritated when I hear others outside my organization criticize the company,” “I would be quite willing to spend the rest of my career with my organization,” “The record of my organization is an example of what dedicated people can achieve,” and “I like to tell others about projects that my organization is working on.” Responses are solicited on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient for the present study was .83 (M = 2.90, SD = 0.89).¹

Job motivation, the degree to which employees are inspired or stimulated to work, was measured with a modified version of Richmond’s (1990) Motivation Scale. Participants responded to the statement “Usually at my part-time job I feel” with three seven-step semantic differential scales: motivated/unmotivated, determined/not determined, and encouraged/not encouraged. The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient for the measure in the present study was .81 (M = 5.03, SD = 1.25).

Career relevance, the degree to which employees believe that their current part-time jobs are useful to their career aspirations, was assessed by asking participants to respond to the statement “My part-time job is giving me valuable experience for the job/career I want to have after graduation” with three seven-step semantic differential scales: strongly agree/strongly disagree, true/false, correct/incorrect. The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient for the present study was .93 (M = 4.04, SD = 2.01).

Results

The primary goal of the study was to gain more understanding of the relationship between part-time employees and their supervisors by using LMX and to explore if the relationship affected organizational assimilation, organizational identification, work motivation, and career relevancy. The four hypotheses were tested by conducting Pearson’s correlations (Table 1), and the research question was analyzed by conducting a multiple regression.

Table 1.

Correlation Matrix of Variables Contained in the Study.

Variable	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
1: Leader-member exchange	.53*	.57*	.22*	.44*	.75*	.50*	.27*	.35*	.44*	.33*
2: Organizational identification	—	.35*	.24*	.26*	.45*	.69*	.16**	.39*	.53*	.49*
3: Supervisor familiarity		—	.35*	.37*	.58*	.39*	.41*	.34*	.29*	.17**
4: Coworker familiarity			—	.28*	.22*	.32*	.32*	.16**	.20**	.14
5: Acculturation				—	.44*	.32*	.29*	.27*	.37*	.25*
6: Recognition					—	.50*	.32*	.33*	.43*	.23**
7: Involvement						—	.29*	.37*	.51*	.36*
8: Job competency							—	.42*	.21**	.10
9: Role negotiation								—	.25*	.23**
10: Job motivation									—	.38*
11: Career relevance										—

p < .01. **p < .05.

The first hypothesis predicted that LMX would be significantly and positively associated with each of the seven dimensions of organizational assimilation. Results revealed support for the hypothesis. LMX was positively related to coworker familiarity (r = .22, r² = .05, p < .001), supervisor familiarity (r = .57, r² = .32, p < .001), acculturation (r = .44, r² = .19, p < .001), recognition (r = .75, r² = .56, p < .001), involvement (r = .50, r² = .25, p < .001), job competency (r = .27, r² = .07, p < .001), and role negotiation (r = .35, r² = .12, p < .001).

The second hypothesis predicted that LMX would be significantly and positively correlated with organizational identification. Results revealed support for the hypothesis, as LMX was significantly and positively related to organizational identification (r = .53, r² = .28, p < .001).

The third hypothesis predicted that LMX would be significantly and positively related to career relevance. Results revealed support for the hypothesis, as LMX was positively related to career relevance (r = .33, r² = .11, p < .001).

The fourth hypothesis predicted that LMX would be positively and significantly related to job motivation. Results revealed support for the hypothesis, as LMX was positively related to work motivation (r = .44, r² = .19, p < .001).

All the hypotheses were tested again controlling for employee sex, supervisor sex, and length of employment. All significant correlations were still significant.

The research question asked what factors best accounted for LMX between supervisors and part-time employees. Based on multiple regression analysis, LMX was regressed on the linear combination of organizational identification, coworker familiarity, supervisor familiarity, acculturation, recognition, involvement, job competency, role negotiation, career relevance, and work motivation. The model accounted for 66% of the variance in LMX, F(10, 201) = 36.90, p < .001. A closer examination of the beta weights revealed organizational identification (β = .17), supervisor familiarity (β = .18), and recognition (β = .53) to be significant predictors of LMX.

Post Hoc Analyses

Thorsteinson (2003) argued that part-time employees are a heterogeneous group (e.g., workers differ on person-job fit) and called for exploring some of these differences. Thus, a series of post hoc analyses were conducted using employees’ reports of hours worked in a week, which were placed in one of two groups. Employees who scored one standard deviation below the mean (12.08) were grouped into the low hours group (n = 40); employees who scored one standard deviation above the mean (27.66) or higher composed the high hours group (n = 51). Results of a multivariate analysis of variance revealed that part-time employees who worked a high amount of hours per week reported greater familiarity with coworkers and supervisors than part-time employees who worked a low number of hours per week (see Table 2).

Table 2.

Differences Based on Hours Worked and Reports of Career Relevance.

	Hours Worked					Career Relevance
	High		Low			High		Low
Variable	M	SD	M	SD	F	M	SD	M	SD	F
Leader-member exchange	3.77	0.72	3.77	0.73	0.001	4.10	0.59	3.57	0.69	12.41*
Organizational identification	2.95	0.89	2.97	0.98	0.02	3.58	0.84	2.32	0.78	43.23*
Coworker familiarity	4.21	0.61	3.90	0.78	4.50**	4.18	0.64	4.09	0.54	0.44
Supervisor familiarity	3.78	0.83	3.37	0.95	4.80**	3.85	0.99	3.59	0.83	1.50
Acculturation	4.25	0.59	4.19	0.68	0.16	4.58	0.45	4.30	0.44	7.57**
Recognition	3.74	0.97	3.77	0.84	0.03	4.10	0.78	3.61	0.87	6.35**
Involvement	3.22	0.99	3.34	0.96	0.33	3.85	0.83	2.90	0.88	22.78**
Job competency	4.16	0.56	3.93	0.71	2.91	4.15	0.62	4.06	0.62	0.38
Role negotiation	3.43	0.82	3.38	0.81	0.13	3.65	0.88	3.25	0.98	3.34
Motivation	5.04	1.26	4.85	1.27	0.50	5.98	1.16	4.51	1.18	28.89*

p < .01. **p < .05.

Using employees’ reports of career relevance, we created two groups. Employees who scored one standard deviation below the mean (2.03) were grouped into the low relevance group (n = 33). Employees who scored one standard deviation above the mean (6.05) were placed into the high relevance group (n = 40). A multivariate analysis of variance revealed that part-time employees who reported higher levels of career relevance reported higher levels of acculturation, recognition, and involvement than part-time employees reporting low career relevance. Additionally, part-time employees reporting high relevance also reported higher LMX and organizational identification than part-time employees reporting low relevance (see Table 2).

Discussion

In this study, part-time study employees who believe that they have higher-quality relationships experience more positive organizational and personal outcomes such as effective assimilation, organizational identification, job motivation, and career relevance. A plentiful amount of researchers have examined the development and outcome of high-quality supervisor-subordinate relationships in full-time working opportunities (Fairhurst, 2001), and this study extends the applicability of LMX theory beyond the confines of full-time work and provides more understanding of part-time employees and their relationships with their supervisors. According to LMX theory, employees and organizations benefit from the development of satisfying supervisor-subordinate relationships. Based on the results of the study, part-time employees recognize the efforts that their supervisors make in developing relationships with them, and they form stronger allegiances to their organization based on the influence of their supervisors. Furthermore, college students work part-time jobs for a myriad of reasons. Experiencing a rewarding relationship with the supervisor may play a role in intensifying or positively influencing the reasons why college students work part-time jobs.

Hypothesis 1 predicted that LMX would be related to organizational assimilation. It is clear from the results that supervisors exert a major impact on the effective assimilation of part-time employees, as LMX was significantly related to each of the seven dimensions of organizational assimilation. The results support Jablin’s (2001) assertion that the supervisor-subordinate relationship is a crucial component of communication in the organization. The results also imply that supervisors play a role in introducing part-time employees to their coworkers and facilitating the development of working relationships important to the functioning of both individuals and the organization. It is possible that as part-time employees feel that their relationship with their supervisor is more fulfilling, they will have improved familiarity and comfort with the people with whom they work (Gailliard et al., 2010). Additionally, LMX was related to the supervisor familiarity dimension of assimilation, meaning that as part-time employees develop their relationships with supervisors, they begin to learn more about them and understand how they conduct themselves in the organization (Jablin, 2001). Supervisors also played an important role in the acculturation of part-time employees into the organization. This finding is consistent with a prominent line of research concluding that the supervisor communicates important information about the cultural norms, standards, and behaviors of the organization (Jablin, 1987, 2001). The supervisor is often the first to introduce employees to the organization (Jablin, 2001), so it seems reasonable that part-time employees rely on the information that their supervisors provide them about their organizations.

A strong relationship was found between LMX and recognition, providing the impression that part-time employees with a closer connection to their supervisors also believe that their ideas and contributions to the organization are valued and acknowledged. They also may experience more recognition because they have greater opportunity to express themselves in the organization (Gorden & Infante, 1991; Kassing, 2000a). Part-time employees further believed that they were more involved when they had a high-quality relationship with their supervisors, meaning that they were more likely to perform duties beyond their job descriptions or praise the organization to those inside and outside the organization. This is an important finding, as Thorsteinson (2003) reported that part-time employees tended to experience less involvement in their organization. The impact of a rewarding relationship with a supervisor seemingly plays a role in helping part-time employees feel more involved with their work (Scott, 1997). Job competency was also affected by LMX quality, as part-time employees believed that they were more capable of demonstrating expertise in the jobs they performed in their organizations. The supervisor is likely the one that begins training employees and providing them a sense of competency in work roles in the organization and thus provides them with needed informational support useful for honing their skills in the organization (Sias, 2005). Consistent with previous LMX research (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995), employees believed that they were better able to negotiate their roles in the organization when they had a high-quality relationship with supervisors. Scholars have long suggested that the communication between employees and supervisors is instrumental in agreeing on individualized work roles and methods for performing activities (Bauer & Green, 1996; Fairhurst, 2001; Graen & Scandura, 1987).

Hypothesis 2 predicted a positive relationship between LMX and organizational identification, which was confirmed. Although no studies have utilized LMX to draw links with organizational identification, this study lends support to the argument made by Scott (1997) that communication between supervisors and subordinates can promote more identification with the organization. It is apparent that forming a relationship with the supervisor helps create positive feelings toward the organization and a desire to perform with the goals of the organization in mind for part-time employees (Cheney, 1983a). It is possible that the identification that part-time employees experience for the organization may keep them more committed to the organization and reduce their intentions to leave it due to dissatisfaction (Martin & Hafer, 1995). The voluntary nature of working part-time jobs for students may play a role in their identification because they are willingly working part-time (Thorsteinson, 2003). The identification that part-time employees experience with the organization may also be precipitated by the possibility that their roles with the organization may expand and develop into a more permanent full-time position in the future (Feldman, 1990). Likewise, if supervisors believe that their part-time employees hold the potential to develop into permanent employees capable of contributing to the organization through an expanded role, they may feel added incentive to communicate with and support them.

Hypothesis 3 predicted that LMX would be significantly and positively related to career relevance, which was confirmed. Scholars have found that students working part-time jobs do tend to enjoy them more when their work is congruent with their career expectations (McKechnie et al., 2010). This result indicates that the relationship that part-time employees form with their supervisors can influence how important part-time employees see their work as being. Supervisors may impart wisdom to their part-time employees or communicate connections between the work that they do in their part-time jobs and what they hope to do in the future.

Hypothesis 4 predicted that LMX would be significantly and positively related to job motivation, which was confirmed. Scholars have shown substantial interest in how managers can affect the motivation of their employees in the organization (Adams, Schlueter, & Barge, 1988; Fairhurst, 2001). The relationship that part-time employees develop with their supervisors may provide a reason to exert effort and determination on the job (Feldman & Doerpinghaus, 1992). The part-time employees in the study may have felt more motivation because their supervisors communicated supportive or informational messages about their roles that then could lead to greater feelings of self-efficacy (Mayfield & Mayfield, 2012). Conversely, it is possible that part-time employees may feel more motivated to perform at their best and help the organization because their supervisors show concern, seek feedback and contributions, and communicate with them (Tierney, Farmer, & Graen, 1999).

Partial correlations were also computed for the purpose of understanding if variables such as employee sex, supervisor sex, and length of employment exerted any impact on the associations between the independent and dependent variables. The results indicated that regardless of employee or supervisor sex and tenure, the outcomes experienced by part-time employees were still affected by the quality of supervisor-subordinate relationships, implying that the communication between supervisors and subordinates is vital for achieving positive organizational and personal outcomes. Additionally, the variables in the study was each entered into a regression equation to discover which best contributed to LMX. Recognition, organizational identification, and supervisor familiarity were significant predictors of LMX, meaning that part-time employees develop closer relationships when they are identified with their organization, familiar with their supervisor, and recognized for the contributions that they have made to the workplace. The significant predictors of LMX are congruent with Graen and Scandura’s (1987) role development model of employees gradually becoming more functioning and autonomous employees. It also suggests more of a reciprocal relationship between supervisor-subordinate relationship quality and organizational outcomes, where one can affect the development of the other (Gailliard et al., 2010; Jablin, 2001).

Implications

A number of implications can be drawn from this study for supervisors and part-time employees. Supervisors are encouraged to provide needed and important information to employees about the work that they perform, and they realize that by communicating with their part-time employees, they could be influencing favorable organizational outcomes, such as assimilation and identification, in addition to personal outcomes, such as motivation and career relevancy. It is also important for supervisors to understand that even though part-time employees have a seemingly reduced role in the organization, a large percentage of their workforce may comprise part-time employees, necessitating effective communication and support for employees. By spending time working with their part-time employees, demonstrating supportive and open verbal communication designed toward including them, supervisors are poised to create an ideal climate for helping both their organizations and part-time employees succeed. Foote (2004) argued that part-time employees often have difficulty socializing into organizations and that better training and recognition of the skill sets of part-time employees could improve their ability to become contributing members of the organization. Thus, supervisors recognize that their current part-time employees could show enough growth and competence in their roles to become valuable and impactful employees in the organization as time progresses. Spending time cultivating the relationship has the potential to pay large dividends for all involved in the organization, as current part-time employees could eventually achieve full-time jobs within the organization. It should be noted that while supervisors can provide their part-time employees with the necessary information and resources to perform their jobs, high-quality LMX relationships are no panacea for organizational and individual outcomes. If employees perceive that their supervisors are providing favoritism or differential treatment to certain employees, it could have adverse effects in the organization, such as splintering the work group or lowering employee performance (Sias & Jablin, 1995; Yukl, 2012, 2013). However, supervisors can be trained to develop better rapport with their employees, which can influence improved employee performance (Graen et al., 1982; Graen, Scandura, & Graen, 1986; Miner, 2005; Scandura & Graen, 1984). Finally, it is possible that multisource feedback from employees and rewards for employee performance could positively influence leader development (Smither, London, & Reilly, 2005).

By forming relationships with their supervisors, part-time employees place themselves in a position to receive needed information about the organization, the culture of the organization, their work roles, and their peer coworkers. Part-time employees can understand that supervisors are excellent sources for informational support. Many college students working part-time jobs may be formulating some of their initial impressions about the responsibilities involved with working a job and their impressions about the specific workplace (Jablin, 1985). The supervisor is a critical source of information that is helpful in reducing the uncertainty that may be felt when entering an organization for the first time (Jablin, 1984, 2001). Additionally, uncertainty may be pervasive regarding the implicit norms or standards of the organizational culture (Louis, 1980). Part-time employees who feel enough comfort to seek guidance and information from their supervisors are better able to receive information vital for their assimilation into the organization. Similarly, part-time employees can begin to form relationships with their peer coworkers through the relationships formed with their supervisors. According to the in-group and out-group dynamic of LMX, part-time employees may find common ground with other employees that have higher-quality relationships with the supervisors. The common ground that they find with other valued employees provides part-time employees another critical source of informational, emotional, and instrumental support in the organization (Cahill & Sias, 1997; Fay & Kline, 2012; Sias, 2005). Part-time employees can also understand that their supervisors likely have experience working in similar situations as their part-time employees. They can impart knowledge and sensitivity to the demands placed on them from taking classes and being a responsible member of the organization.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

This study does have limitations. First, the results in this study are correlational, meaning that no causal inferences should be made. Second, the study relied on self-report data from participants. However, the primary focus of the study was to explore the perceptions that part-time employees held about the relationships with their supervisors. Also scholars have typically explored LMX through the use of self-report measures, finding them to be accurate representations of organizational experiences (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). Third, the data were collected at only one point in time, making it difficult to explore the development of the supervisor-subordinate relationship over an extended period. Fourth, we did not look at the messages that supervisors use with their employees, preventing us from examining the content of communication. Fifth, scholars have criticized the use of the Organizational Identification Questionnaire, stating that the measure is nearly isomorphic, with organizational commitment due to high correlations between the two measures (V. D. Miller, Allen, Casey, & Johnson, 2000; Sass & Canary, 1991). While we believe that the five items selected from the questionnaire tap into the construct of organizational identification, we acknowledge the criticism of the Organizational Identification Questionnaire overall.

The supervisor-subordinate relationship is just one influence in helping employees achieve organizational and personal outcomes. Future research could focus attention on the relationships that part-time employees form with their peer coworkers, and it could examine personal or organizational outcomes. Because peer coworkers can be great sources of support and information (Kram & Isabella, 1985; Jablin, 2001), they could have an impact on helping college students handle their dual responsibilities of attending classes full-time while logging hours in their part-time jobs. It would be reasonable to expect that college students who develop higher-quality relationships with their peer coworkers would be in a better position to thrive in the organization and handle the stresses of working and attending college simultaneously. Because part-time employees feel varying amounts of integration into their organization, it would be worthwhile to explore possible reasons why part-time employees feel lower amounts of assimilation and identification with the organization. Specifically, supervisors’ behaviors and messages used with part-time employees could be assessed as an indicator of their levels of assimilation and identification in addition to motivation and the relevancy of the part-time job toward future careers. To that end, because the results of this study were obtained via survey research, it would be advantageous to conduct interviews with employees and supervisors to gain a more thorough description of how in-group/out-group relationships develop and what consequences they have for organizations and their employees.

Additionally, the development of supervisor-subordinate relationships and organizational assimilation are both considered to be ongoing processes (Bauer & Green, 1996; Bullis, 1999; Bullis & Bach, 1989; Gailliard et al., 2010; Jablin, 2001; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). It would be beneficial to study changes in the trajectory of the supervisor-subordinate relationship (because the benefits of being in-group members may diminish over time; Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995) and the assimilation of part-time employees longitudinally. By studying the assimilation of part-time employees, researchers may better understand the differing patterns of assimilation and which organizational or personal characteristics affect it the most at different points in their organizational tenure. Furthermore, because the relationship that supervisors have with their immediate supervisors tends to affect the quality of relationship that subordinates report (Graen, Cashman, Ginsburg, & Schiemann, 1977; Jablin, 1979, 1980; Lee, 1997; Tangirala, Green, & Ramanujam, 2007), researchers may find it useful to explore additional moderators of supervisor-subordinate relationship quality, such as the linking pin or the Pelz effect. The linking pin theory is concerned with organizations being composed of interconnected units where members hold multiple memberships. An employee could be a member of one unit and a leader of another unit, thus necessitating boundary spanning between different units of the organization. The Pelz effect is concerned with employees feeling a closer connection to their supervisors if their supervisors have a close connection with their immediate supervisors. Thus, LMX could be informed by additional relational influences in the organization. Finally, Martin and Sinclair (2007) found that part-time employees can be divided into eight segments of the workforce: primaries, high school students, college students, single supplementers, older married supplementers, younger married supplementers, and moonlighters. Researchers could explore various organizational and personal outcomes associated with the different types of part-time workers (e.g., voluntary/involuntary, college students/senior citizens, main job/second job, skilled/nonskilled).

Conclusion

Overall, this study contributes to the literature by providing more substantive understanding about the relationship between college students working part-time jobs and their supervisors. When college student part-time employees perceive higher-quality relationships with their supervisors, they experience more positive organizational and personal outcomes, benefiting both the individual and the organization.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biographies

Michael Sollitto (MS, Murray State University, 2010) is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Communication Studies at West Virginia University.

Matthew M. Martin (PhD, Kent State University, 1995) is a professor and chairperson in the Department of Communication Studies at West Virginia University.

Shelly Dusic (MA, West Virginia University, 2012) is employed in the healthcare industry.

Kaitlyn E. Gibbons (MA, West Virginia University, 2012) is employed in the public relations industry.

Anna Wagenhouser (MA, West Virginia University, 2012) is employed in the marketing industry.

References

Adams

C. H.

Schlueter

D. W.

Barge

J. K.

(1988). Communication and motivation within the superior-subordinate dyad: Testing the conventional wisdom of volunteer management. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 16, 69-81. doi:10.1080/00909888809365274

Ashforth

B. E.

Harrison

S. H.

Corley

K. G.

(2008). Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34, 325-374. doi:10.1177/0149203083165059

Bakar

H. A.

Dilbeck

K. E.

McCroskey

J. C.

(2010). Mediating role of supervisory communication practices on relations between leader-member exchange and perceived employee commitment to workgroup. Communication Monographs, 77, 637-656. doi:10.1080/03637751.2010.499104

Ballard

D. I.

Gossett

L. M.

(2008). Alternative times: Temporal perceptions, processes, and practices defining the nonstandard work relationship. In Beck

C. S.

(Ed.), Communication yearbook 31 (pp. 274-320). New York: Erlbaum.

Bauer

T. N.

Green

S. G.

(1996). Development of leader-member exchange: A longitudinal test. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1538-1567.

Bezuijen

X. H.

van Dam

van den Berg

P. T.

Thierry

(2010). How leaders stimulate employee learning: A leader-member exchange approach. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 83, 673-693. doi:10.1348/096317909x468099

Bullis

(1999). Mad or bad: A response to Kramer and Miller. Communication Monographs, 66, 368-373. doi:10.1080/03637759909376486

Bullis

Bach

B. W.

(1989). Socialization turning points: An examination of change in organizational identification. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53, 273-293. doi:10.1080/10570318909374307

Cahill

D. J.

Sias

P. M.

(1997). The perceived social costs and importance of seeking emotional support in the workplace: Gender differences and similarities. Communication Research Reports, 14, 231-240. doi:10.1080/08824099709388665

10.

Cheney

(1983a). On the various and changing meanings of organizational membership: A field study of organizational identification. Communication Monographs, 50, 342-362. doi:10.1080/03637758309390174

11.

Cheney

(1983b). The rhetoric of identification and the study of organizational communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 69, 143-158. doi:10.1080/00335638309383643

12.

Cheney

Tompkins

P. K.

(1987). Coming to terms with organizational identification and commitment. Central States Speech Journal, 38, 1-15.

13.

Curtis

Shani

(2002). The effect of taking paid employment during term-time on students’ academic studies. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 26, 131-180. doi:10.1080/03098770220129406

14.

Dansereau

Cashman

Graen

G. B.

(1973). Instrumentality theory and equity theory as complementary approaches in predicting the relationship of leaders and turnover among managers. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 10, 184-200.

15.

Dansereau

Graen

G. B.

Haga

W. J.

(1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 13, 46-78.

16.

Deluga

R. J.

(1994). Supervisor trust building, leader-member exchange and organizational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, 315-326. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.1994.tb00570.x

17.

Eberhardt

B. J.

Shani

A. B.

(1984). The effects of full-time versus part-time employment status on attitudes toward specific organizational characteristics and overall job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 893-900.

18.

Fairhurst

G. T.

(2001). Dualisms in leadership research. In Jablin

F. M.

Putnam

L. L.

(Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp. 379-439). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

19.

Fairhurst

G. T.

Chandler

T. A.

(1989). Social structure in leader-member interaction. Communication Monographs, 56, 215-239. doi:10.1080/03637758909390261

20.

Farrell

E. F.

(2005, February 5). More students plan to work to help pay for college. Chronicle of Higher Education, 51, A1-A4.

21.

Fay

M. J.

Kline

S. L.

(2012). The influence of informal communication on organizational identification and commitment in the context of high-intensity telecommuting. Southern Communication Journal, 77, 61-76. doi:10.1080/1041794x.2011.582921

22.

Feldman

D. C.

(1990). Reconceptualizing the nature and consequences of part-time work. Academy of Management Review, 15, 103-112.

23.

Feldman

D. C.

Doerpinghaus

H. I.

(1992). Patterns of part-time employment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 41, 282-294.

24.

Foote

D. A.

(2004). Temporary workers: Managing the problem of unscheduled turnover. Management Decision, 42, 963-973. doi:10.1108/00251740410555452

25.

Gailliard

B. M.

Myers

K. K.

Seibold

D. R.

(2010). Organizational assimilation: A multidimensional reconceptualization and measure. Management Communication Quarterly, 24, 552-578. doi:10.1177/0893318910374933

26.

Gerstner

C. R.

Day

D. V.

(1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827-844. doi:10.1037//0021-9010.82.6.827

27.

Gorden

W. I.

Infante

D. A.

(1991). Test of a communication model of organizational commitment. Communication Quarterly, 39, 144-155. doi:10.1080/01463379109369792

28.

Graen

Cashman

J. F.

Ginsburg

Schiemann

(1977). Effects of linking-pin quality on the quality of working life of lower participants. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 491-504. doi:10.2307/2392185

29.

Graen

Novak

M. A.

Sommerkamp

(1982). The effects of leader-member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction: Testing a dual attachment model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30, 109-131.

30.

Graen

G. B.

Scandura

T. A.

(1987). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. In Cummings

L. L.

Shaw

B. M.

(Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 175-208). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

31.

Graen

G. B.

Scandura

T. A.

Graen

M. R.

(1986). A field experimental test of moderating effects of growth need strength on productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 484-491. doi:10.1037//0021-9010.71.3.484

32.

Graen

G. B.

Uhl-Bien

(1991). The transformation of professionals into self-managing and partially self-designing contributors: Toward a theory of leadership making. Journal of Management Systems, 3, 25-39.

33.

Graen

G. B.

Uhl-Bien

(1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of Leader-Member Exchange Theory. Leadership Quarterly, 219-247.

34.

Greenberger

Steinberg

L. D.

(1981). The workplace as a context for the socialization of youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 10, 185-208. doi:10.1037//0012-1649.29.2.171

35.

Greenberger

Steinberg

L. D.

Ruggiero

(1982). A job is a job is a job… or is it? Work and Occupations, 9, 79-96.

36.

Greenberger

Steinberg

L. D.

Vaux

McAuliffe

(1980). Adolescents who work: Effects of part-time employment on family and peer relationships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 9, 189-202.

37.

Harris

K. J.

Kacmar

K. M.

(2006). Too much of a good thing: The curvilinear effect of leader-member exchange on stress. Journal of Social Psychology, 146, 65-84. doi:10.3200/SOCP.146.1.65-84

38.

Jablin

F. M.

(1979). Superior-subordinate communication: The state of the art. Psychological Bulletin, 6, 1201-1222.

39.

Jablin

F. M.

(1980). Superior’s upward influence, satisfaction, and openness in superior-subordinate communication: A reexamination of the “Pelz effect.” Human Communication Research, 6, 210-220. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1980.tb00141.x

40.

Jablin

F. M.

(1984). Assimilating new members into organizations. In Bostrom

R. N.

(Ed.), Communication yearbook 8 (pp. 594-626). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

41.

Jablin

F. M.

(1985). An exploratory study of vocational organizational communication socialization. Southern Speech Communication Journal, 50, 261-282. doi:10.1080/ 10417948509372635

42.

Jablin

F. M.

(1987). Organizational entry, assimilation, and exit. In Jablin

F. M.

Putnam

L. L.

Roberts

K. H.

Porter

L. W.

(Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 679-740). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

43.

Jablin

F. M.

(2001). Organizational entry, assimilation, and disengagement/exit. In Jablin

F. M.

Putnam

L. L.

(Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp. 732-818). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

44.

Jablin

F. M.

Krone

K. J.

(1987). Organizational assimilation. In Berger

C. R.

Chaffee

S. H.

(Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 711-746). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

45.

Jackofsky

E. F.

Peters

L. H.

(1987). Part-time versus full-time employment status differences: A replication and extension. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 8, 1-9.

46.

Kalleberg

A. L.

(2000). Nonstandard employment relations: Part-time, temporary, and contract work. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 341-365.

47.

Kane

S. T.

Healy

C. C.

Henson

(1992). College students and their part-time jobs: Job congruency, satisfaction, and quality. Journal of Employment Counseling, 29, 138-144.

48.

Kassing

J. W.

(2000a). Exploring the relationship between workplace freedom of speech, organizational identification, and employee dissent. Communication Research Reports, 17, 387-396. doi:10.1080/08824090009388787

49.

Kassing

J. W.

(2000b). Investigating the relationship between superior-subordinate relationship quality and employee dissent. Communication Research Reports, 17, 58-69. doi:10.1080/08824090009388751

50.

King

J. E.

(2006). Working their way through college: Student employment and its impact on the college experience. Retrieved from http://www.acenet.edu/AM/Template.cfm?template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentFileID=1618

51.

Kram

K. F.

Isabella

L. A.

(1985). Mentoring alternatives: The role of peer relationships in career development. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 110-132.

52.

Krone

K. J.

Kramer

M. W.

Sias

P. M.

(2010). Theoretical developments in organizational communication research. In Berger

C. R.

Roloff

M. E.

Roskos-Ewoldsen

D. R.

(Eds.), The handbook of communication science (pp. 165-182). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

53.

Lee

(1997). Leader-member exchange, the “Pelz effect,” and cooperative communication between group members. Management Communication Quarterly, 11, 266-287. doi:10.1177/0893318997112004

54.

Levanoni

Sales

C. A.

(1990). Differences in job attitudes between full-time and part-time Canadian employees. Journal of Social Psychology, 130, 231-237. doi:10.1080/002245.1990.9924574.

55.

Liden

R. C.

Graen

(1980). Generalizability of the vertical dyad linkage model of leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 451-465.

56.

Logan

O’Reilly

Roberts

K. H.

(1973). Job satisfaction among part-time and full-time employees. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 3, 33-41.

57.

Louis

M. R.

(1980). Surprise and sensemaking: What new-comers experience in entering unfamiliar organizational settings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 226- 251.

58.

Lucas

Lamont

(1998). Combining work and study: An empirical study of full-time students in school, college, and university. Journal of Education and Work, 11, 41-56. doi:10.1080/1363908980110103

59.

Marsteller

(2011, November 10). Is workforce turning temp? Labor analysts divided over whether shift to part-time hiring will ever turn back. Tennessean. Retrieved from http://www.tennessean.com

60.

Martin

J. E.

Sinclair

R. R.

(2007). A typology of the part-time workforce: Differences on job attitudes and turnover. Journal of Organization Psychology, 80, 301-319. doi:10.1348/096317906x113833

61.

Martin

T. N.

Hafer

J. C.

(1995). The multiplicative interaction effects of job involvement and organizational commitment on the turnover intentions of full- and part-time employees. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 46, 310-331.

62.

Mayfield

(2012). The relationship between leader motivating language and self-efficacy: A partial least squares model analysis. Journal of Business Communication, 49, 357-376. doi:10.1177/0021943612456036

63.

McKechnie

Hobbs

Simpson

Anderson

Howieson

Semple

(2010). School students’ part-time work: Understanding what they do. Journal of Education and Work, 23, 161-175. doi:10.1080/13639080903565665

64.

Miller

H. E.

Terborg

J. R.

(1979). Job attitudes of part-time and full-time employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 380-386.

65.

Miller

V. D.

Allen

Casey

M. K.

Johnson

J. R.

(2000). Reconsidering the Organizational Identification Questionnaire. Management Communication Quarterly, 13, 626-658. doi:10.1177/0893318900134003

66.

Miller

V. D.

Poole

M. S.

Seibold

D. R.

(2011). Advancing research in organizational communication through quantitative analysis. Management Communication Quarterly, 25, 4-58. doi:10.1177/0893318910390193

67.

Miner

J. B.

(2005). Organizational behavior 1: Essential theories of motivation and leadership. Armonk, NY: Sharpe.

68.

Mueller

B. H.

Lee

(2002). Leader-member exchange and organizational communication satisfaction in multiple contexts. Journal of Business Communication, 39, 220-244. doi:10.1177/00219436020390020

69.

Myers

K. K.

Oetzel

J. G.

(2003). Exploring the dimensions of organizational assimilation: Creating and validating a measure. Communication Quarterly, 51, 438-457. doi:10.1080/01463370309370166

70.

Myers

S. A.

Kassing

J. W.

(1998). The relationship between perceived supervisory communication behaviors and subordinate organizational identification. Communication Research Reports, 15, 71-81. doi:10.1080/08824099809362099

71.

Nonis

S. A.

Hudson

G. I.

(2006). Academic performance of college students: Influence of time spent studying and working. Journal of Education for Business, 81, 151-179. doi:10.3200/JOEB.81.3.151-159

72.

Perna

L. W.

(2010). Understanding the working college student. Academe, 96, 30-33.

73.

Porter

Wrench

J. S.

Hoskinson

(2007). The influence of supervisor temperament on subordinate job satisfaction and perceptions of supervisor sociocommunicative orientation and approachability. Communication Quarterly, 55, 129-153. doi:10.1080/0463370600998517

74.

Richardson

Evans

Gbadamosi

(2009). Funding full-time study through part-time work. Journal of Education and Work, 22, 319-334. doi:10.1080/13639080903277394

75.

Richmond

V. P.

(1990). Communication in the classroom: Power and motivation. Communication Education, 39, 181-195. doi:10.1080/03634529009378801

76.

Rotchford

N. L.

Roberts

K. H.

(1982). Part-time workers as missing persons in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 7, 228-234.

77.

Sass

J. S.

Canary

D. J.

(1991). Organizational commitment and identification: An examination of conceptual and operational convergence. Western Journal of Communication, 55, 275-293. doi:10.1080/10570319109374385

78.

Scandura

T. A.

Graen

G. B.

(1984). Moderating effects of initial leader-member exchange status on the effects of a leadership intervention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 428-436. doi:10.1037//0021-9010.69.3.428

79.

Scandura

T. A.

Schriesheim

C. A.

(1994). Leader-member exchange and supervisor career mentoring as complimentary constructs in leadership research. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1588-1602. doi:10.2307/256800

80.

Scott

C. R.

(1997). Identification with multiple targets in a geographically dispersed organization. Management Communication Quarterly, 10, 491-522. doi:10.1177/0893318997104004

81.

Scott

C. R.

Connaughton

S. L.

Diaz-Saenz

H. R.

Maguire

Ramirez

Richardson

. . . Morgan

(1999). The impacts of communication and multiple identifications on intent to leave: A multiplemethodological exploration. Management Communication Quarterly, 12, 400-435. doi:10.1177/0893318999123002

82.

Scott

C. R.

Corman

S. R.

Cheney

(1998). Development of a structurational model of identification in the organization. Communication Theory, 8, 298-336. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1998.tb00223.x

83.

Scott

C. R.

Stephens

K. K.

(2009). It depends on who you’re talking to . . . : Predictors and outcomes of situated measures of organizational identification. Western Journal of Communication, 73, 370-394. doi:10.1080/10570310903279075

84.

Sias

P. M.

(2005). Workplace relationship quality and employee information experiences. Communication Studies, 56, 375-395. doi:10.1080/10510970500319450

85.

Sias

P. M.

Jablin

F. M.

(1995). Differential superior-subordinate relations, perceptions of fairness, and coworker communication. Human Communication Research, 22, 5-38. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1995.tb00360.x

86.

Sluss

D. M.

Ashforth

B. E.

(2008). How relational and organizational identification converge: Processes and conditions. Organization Science, 19, 807-823. doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0349

87.

Sluss

D. M.

Ployhart

R. E.

Cobb

M. G.

Ashforth

B. E.

(2012). Generalizing newcomers’ relational and organizational identifications: Processes and prototypicality. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 949-974. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.420

88.

Smither

J. W.

London

Reilly

R. R.

(2005). Does performance improve following multisource feedback? A theoretical model, meta-analysis, and review of empirical findings. Personnel Psychology, 58, 33-66. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.514_1.x

89.

Sollitto

Johnson

Z. D.

Myers

S. A.

(2013). Students’ perceptions of college classroom connectedness, assimilation, and peer relationships. Communication Education, 62, 1-14. doi:10.1080/03634523.2013.788726

90.

Steffy

B. D.

Jones

J. W.

(1990). Differences between full-time and part-time employees in perceived role strain and work satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 321-329.

91.

Steinberg

Fegley

Dornbusch

S. M.

(1993). Negative impact of part-time work on adolescent adjustment: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 29, 171-180. doi:10.1037//0012-1649.29.2.171

92.

Stephens

K. K.

Dailey

S. L.

(2012). Situated organization identification in newcomers: Impacts of preentry organizational exposure. Management Communication Quarterly, 26, 404-422. doi:10.1177/0893318912440179

93.

Stern

Stone

J. R.

Hopkins

McMillion

(1990). Quality of students’ work experience and orientation toward work. Youth and Society, 22, 263-282.

94.

Tangirala

Green

S. G.

Ramanujam

(2007). In the shadow of the boss’s boss: Effects of supervisors’ upward exchange relationships on employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 309-320. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.309

95.

Thorsteinson

T. J.

(2003). Job attitudes of part-time versus full-time workers: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 151-177. doi:10.1348/ 096317903765913687

96.

Tierney

Farmer

S. M.

Graen

G. B.

(1999). An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology, 52, 591-620. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00173.x

97.

Tilly

(1992). Dualisms in part-time employment. Industrial Relations, 31, 330-347.

98.

Wakefield

D. S.

Curry

J. P.

Mueller

C. W.

Price

J. L.

(1987). Differences in the importance of work outcomes between full-time and part-time hospital employees. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 8, 25-35.

99.

Waldron

V. R.

(1991). Achieving communication goals in superior-subordinate relationships: The multi-functionality of upward maintenance tactics. Communication Monographs, 58, 289-306. doi:10.1080/03637759109376231

100.

Waldron

V. R.

Sanderson

(2011). The role of subjective threat in upward influence situations. Communication Quarterly, 59, 239-254. doi:10.1080/01463373.2011.563444

101.

Walther

J. B.

(1988). Communication satisfaction in the bank: An audit evaluation. Journal of Business Communication, 25, 79-86. doi:10.1177/0021943688025003

102.

Yukl

(2012). Effective leadership behavior: What we know and what questions need more attention. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26, 66-85. doi:10.5465/amp.2012.0088

103.

Yukl

(2013). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.